Paris is the only place I'd leave NYC to live. Its one of the most beautiful cities in the world.

Venice is Venice and it is worth visiting at least once if not more. It's slowly sinking into the Adriatic so there will be a time that the entire place will be condemned. Perhaps not in our lifetime but with the frequency and severity of their floods, it may be sooner than later.

This doesn't help me pick between the two at all.
I suppose I'll have to find a way to squeeze Venice in the itinerary. It might get a bit hectic though.

Save Paris for another trip. Florence to Venice is an easy drive or even easier train ride.

Two days in any city on your itinerary is already pushing it. You hardly have enough time to see let alone enjoy any of them.

Since we're going to be in Alsace/Strasbourg, Paris wouldn't be that far out would it? I was sure I want to leave out Paris during this trip but it seems like almost everyone is recommending that I should put Paris back onto the itinerary.

What are you trying to accomplish by visiting all these places? If it's to check each city off as "been there" then yes- add Paris. You're already going to another major city like Rome which is also brief. Do you want to add another? Ive done a Paris and Rome trip, spending 3 days in each, and felt like I short changed myself.

We all want something different out of our vacations but spending one or two days in any city isn't enough time to get anything of substance out of it. You may see the Louvre, Versailles, and have a coffee or two at a cafe but did you really "see" Paris?

After my last trip, I told myself I will no longer try to just check things off my list. I would rather spend more time in fewer cities and enjoy them. It's just that Paris was in the original plan and the people I talked to made it seem like it's not to be missed. I agree with you guys though. If we go to Paris we would be there for about 3-4 days and that might not be enough to really enjoy much and take in the culture.

I was set to leave out Paris until this comment...thanks for making my decision harder.

You'll have a great time regardless where you travel. I will say that among some of the larger cities in Europe/UK, I would pick visiting Paris over London or Rome.

Paris is truly a great city. The art, architecture, food, sites - all outstanding. Even the subway system is terrific. Last time I went, we rented a condo near Les Invalides rather than staying in a hotel, shopped for food at La Grande Epicerie, ate some at cafes and restaurants, and did lots of site seeing.

Among the MANY museums including le Louvre, the one museum I wanted to visit twice was le Centre Pompidou (modern art).

You'll have a great time regardless where you travel. I will say that among some of the larger cities in Europe/UK, I would pick visiting Paris over London or Rome.

Paris is truly a great city. The art, architecture, food, sites - all outstanding. Even the subway system is terrific. Last time I went, we rented a condo near Les Invalides rather than staying in a hotel, shopped for food at La Grande Epicerie, ate some at cafes and restaurants, and did lots of site seeing.

Among the MANY museums including le Louvre, the one museum I wanted to visit twice was le Centre Pompidou (modern art).

After my last trip, I told myself I will no longer try to just check things off my list. I would rather spend more time in fewer cities and enjoy them. It's just that Paris was in the original plan and the people I talked to made it seem like it's not to be missed. I agree with you guys though. If we go to Paris we would be there for about 3-4 days and that might not be enough to really enjoy much and take in the culture.

I think you answered your own question in your first two sentences. IMO, Paris is the most beautiful of the major cities in Europe and worth a dedicated trip where you're not rushed.

I suppose I'm spoiled living on the east coat because we can fly to Paris or Milan in under 7 hours (despite the 7:40 published flight time) which is perfect for along weekend.

If people get the slightest hint that you're an affluent foreigner, they will rip you off and take total advantage of you. You'll be driven around in circles by taxi so as to increase the fare. You'll be overcharged in coffee or ice cream shops under the aegis of miscommunication (due to any language barriers if you don't speak italian).

The northern (and generally more affluent) parts of Italy are more well-behaved. Hell, I've found north Italians openly make fun of their southern counterparts for having a reputation for swindling, stealing, or lying for financial gain.

If people get the slightest hint that you're an affluent foreigner, they will rip you off and take total advantage of you. You'll be driven around in circles by taxi so as to increase the fare. You'll be overcharged in coffee or ice cream shops under the aegis of miscommunication (due to any language barriers if you don't speak italian).

The northern (and generally more affluent) parts of Italy are more well-behaved. Hell, I've found north Italians openly make fun of their southern counterparts for having a reputation for swindling, stealing, or lying for financial gain.

Many people I know in northern Italy don't even consider those in the south as Italians although they love food from Amalfi

I've been to all of your planned destinations and I love them all.
All of the main sights are more than worth visiting.

In Rome I would add these two less obvious visits:
1. The catacombs outside the city. We walked but we are both avid hikers and endurance athletes, a bus might be preferable for many. Early Christians were not allowed to bury their family in the city so they did it in secrecy outside the city walls. Strong historic vibe here.

2. Galleria Borghese. I was not interested in sculptures until I visited this place. Some absolutely amazing pieces by Bernini and you get up close enough to touch ( not allowed ) and even at an arms length the rock hard marble beds for example looks like soft mattresses. And then you realize that Rome is full of Bernini sculptures. One of these would take a normal human a life time without even getting close.

In Venice you should aim to get onto the water. A tour on Grand Canal or just the water taxi will do. I second Danieli if you can swing it. We stayed there for part of our honeymoon.